CASE COMMENTS : STATE AIDS – CONCEPT OF STATE AID – ADVANTAGE – PRIVATE INVESTOR TEST – FISCAL MEANS – INCREASE IN SHARE CAPITAL – CONDUCT OF A STATE ACTING AS A PRUDENT PRIVATE INVESTOR IN A MARKET ECONOMY – CRITERIA TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE STATE AS SHAREHOLDER AND THE STATE EXERCISING PUBLIC POWER – DEFINITION OF ‘REFERENCE PRIVATE INVESTOR’ – ENERGY

Private investor test: The Court of Justice rules that the General Court did not err in law in finding that the private investor test may be applicable even where fiscal means have been employed (EDF)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. CJEU, 5 June 2012, Commission v. EDF, Case C-124/10 P The data The Commission had brought an appeal before the Court of Justice against the judgment of 5 December 2009 in which the Court of First Instance annulled Articles 3 and 4 of the Commission Decision of 16 December 2003 on State aid granted by France to EDF (CFI, EDF v Commission, T-156/04). The case is part of a vast operation by France combining considerations of financial, accounting and tax transparency in the management of EDF and a recapitalisation of the company. France may not have been very inspired by the opportunity to link the two operations without distinguishing them sufficiently.

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

Quotation

Jean-Yves Chérot, Private investor test: The Court of Justice rules that the General Court did not err in law in finding that the private investor test may be applicable even where fiscal means have been employed (EDF), 5 June 2012, Concurrences N° 3-2012, Art. N° 48428, pp. 169-171

Visites 445

All reviews